TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 1303X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the fact that the appeal is a valuable right as provided under the statute, and in view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant that if little more time is granted, they would comply with the condition of pre-deposit, and in the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to dispose of the appeals with the directions - Decided partly in favor of appellant. - C.E.A.(sr).No. 3371 of 2014 and C.E.A.No. 106 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 21-8-2015 - SRI G.CHANDRAIAH AND SRI CHALLA KODANDA RAM, JJ. FOR THE PETITIONER : PRABHAKARA RAO FOR THE RESPONDENT : GOPALAKRISHNA GOKHALEY COMMON ORDER: - (per Hon ble Sri Justice Challa Kodanda Ram) Inasmuch as the question of fact and law and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al, by Misc. Order dated 09.07.2013, extended time up to 14.08.2013 for compliance with the conditional order. When the appellant filed an application seeking modification of the Stay order in respect of the pre-deposit, the Tribunal, by order dated 04.09.2013, while dismissing the application, extended time till 29.10.2013 for compliance, on which date, the matter was further adjourned to 27.02.2014 in view of a letter received from the appellant stating that they are proposing to engage another advocate. Subsequently, when the matter was called on 14.08.2014, another letter was received from the appellant indicating that on 13.08.2014, they filed C.E.A.(sr).No.3771 of 2014 before this Court challenging the Misc. Orders dated 17.04.2013 an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eaded financial hardship, no material as such has been placed before the Court to substantiate their plea. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material placed on record. A careful perusal of the impugned orders passed from time to time reveal that the aspect of financial stringency and the capacity of the appellant to make predeposit for a sum of ₹ 10.00 lakhs against the tax liability of ₹ 11,70,317/-, has not been really adverted to and considered by the Tribunal. However, the Tribunal was considerate enough to have extended grace period from to time. Whatever may be the situation seemed to be as on 17.04.2013 when an order of pre-deposit was made, sufficient time was granted to the appellant to comp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
